tion law (no. 23.592),
44
holding that the equivalent restrictions of non-Internet speech would be
unacceptable.
A recent case involving a social networking
site illustrates some of the tensions between law
enforcement needs and individuals’ right to privacy. In 2005 the Brazilian government took issue
with Google’s social networking site, Orkut, when
it became evident that it was being used for the
sale of illegal drugs 45 and child pornography, and
had also become a domain for racist speech.
46
The National Reporting Center of Cyber Crimes,
which operates in partnership with the Ministério
Público Federal, brought civil and criminal court
lawsuits against Google’s Brazilian unit alleging
failure to stop the spread of child pornography
and hate speech. 47 In 2006 Google agreed to
comply with the Brazilian government’s request
that they track all users and hand over the identities of users involved in these and other illegal
activities. 48
Defamation
The bulk of filtering in the Latin American region
arises from court order. Conceptually, defamation
covers a broad swath of unlawful acts in the
region, primarily distinguished by the status of
the person(s) harmed. In addition to defamation
of individuals and antidiscrimination laws banning hate speech (group defamation), the majority of countries in Latin America have laws
against desacato (disrespect, insult against, or
comtempt for public figures). 49
Hate speech is regulated by some Latin
American countries. In Brazil, the Criminal Code
includes the crime of prejudice on the basis of
race, color, religion, ethnic background, or
national origin. 50 The Brazilian Constitution,
which establishes racism as a crime not entitled
to bail or statutes of limitation, has been used as
the legal basis for search engine takedowns. 51 In
Argentina’s antidiscrimination law, a crime is considered more serious if racism is involved. 52
In Argentina the defendant in the case
Jujuy.com v. Omar Lozano was found liable for
publishing slanderous content on his Web site
after imputing adulterous conduct to a couple
and failing to remove the content promptly. An
injunction was imposed and damages were set
at USD40,000. 53 In a “defamation of the public
image” case, the Brazilian court ordered the
country’s seven largest ISPs to block the Web
site of a travel company based in the United
States called “Tours Gone Wild,” which reportedly sells and promotes sexual tourism packages to
Rio. A Brazilian citizen had sued the Web site
claiming photos were used on the Web site without permission. 54 These judicial strategies may
be incorporated into future legislative moves by
the Brazilian government or other Latin American
countries.
Although many countries have declared
desacato laws unconstitutional, 55 others—such
as Panama
56
and Venezuela
57
—are increasing
restrictions on press freedom through such
defamation laws. A 1999 desacato case in Costa
Rica, where the journalist Mauricio Herrera Ulloa
published accounts of the illegal acts of a public
official, led to a judicial order to remove the name
of the plaintiff from a newspaper Web site and to
criminal convictions against Herrera Ulloa. 58
However, the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights ruled that the conviction of Herrera Ulloa
was a violation of his right to freedom of expression under the American Convention on Human
Rights. 59
In 2006 a Brazil court extended the 1967
Press Law
60
to apply to Internet publications and
fined a magazine, Veja Online, for defaming an
ex-official in an article published online. 61 The
2006 elections in Brazil provide a prominent
example of desacato being brought into cyberspace, as well as the self-regulating stance taken
by Brazilian ISPs. Senate candidate (and former
President) Jose Sarney sued and won his case in
the electoral court (which exists in part to “ensure
that all candidates are fairly represented in the
200
Regional Overviews
44
holding that the equivalent restrictions of non-Internet speech would be
unacceptable.
A recent case involving a social networking
site illustrates some of the tensions between law
enforcement needs and individuals’ right to privacy. In 2005 the Brazilian government took issue
with Google’s social networking site, Orkut, when
it became evident that it was being used for the
sale of illegal drugs 45 and child pornography, and
had also become a domain for racist speech.
46
The National Reporting Center of Cyber Crimes,
which operates in partnership with the Ministério
Público Federal, brought civil and criminal court
lawsuits against Google’s Brazilian unit alleging
failure to stop the spread of child pornography
and hate speech. 47 In 2006 Google agreed to
comply with the Brazilian government’s request
that they track all users and hand over the identities of users involved in these and other illegal
activities. 48
Defamation
The bulk of filtering in the Latin American region
arises from court order. Conceptually, defamation
covers a broad swath of unlawful acts in the
region, primarily distinguished by the status of
the person(s) harmed. In addition to defamation
of individuals and antidiscrimination laws banning hate speech (group defamation), the majority of countries in Latin America have laws
against desacato (disrespect, insult against, or
comtempt for public figures). 49
Hate speech is regulated by some Latin
American countries. In Brazil, the Criminal Code
includes the crime of prejudice on the basis of
race, color, religion, ethnic background, or
national origin. 50 The Brazilian Constitution,
which establishes racism as a crime not entitled
to bail or statutes of limitation, has been used as
the legal basis for search engine takedowns. 51 In
Argentina’s antidiscrimination law, a crime is considered more serious if racism is involved. 52
In Argentina the defendant in the case
Jujuy.com v. Omar Lozano was found liable for
publishing slanderous content on his Web site
after imputing adulterous conduct to a couple
and failing to remove the content promptly. An
injunction was imposed and damages were set
at USD40,000. 53 In a “defamation of the public
image” case, the Brazilian court ordered the
country’s seven largest ISPs to block the Web
site of a travel company based in the United
States called “Tours Gone Wild,” which reportedly sells and promotes sexual tourism packages to
Rio. A Brazilian citizen had sued the Web site
claiming photos were used on the Web site without permission. 54 These judicial strategies may
be incorporated into future legislative moves by
the Brazilian government or other Latin American
countries.
Although many countries have declared
desacato laws unconstitutional, 55 others—such
as Panama
56
and Venezuela
57
—are increasing
restrictions on press freedom through such
defamation laws. A 1999 desacato case in Costa
Rica, where the journalist Mauricio Herrera Ulloa
published accounts of the illegal acts of a public
official, led to a judicial order to remove the name
of the plaintiff from a newspaper Web site and to
criminal convictions against Herrera Ulloa. 58
However, the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights ruled that the conviction of Herrera Ulloa
was a violation of his right to freedom of expression under the American Convention on Human
Rights. 59
In 2006 a Brazil court extended the 1967
Press Law
60
to apply to Internet publications and
fined a magazine, Veja Online, for defaming an
ex-official in an article published online. 61 The
2006 elections in Brazil provide a prominent
example of desacato being brought into cyberspace, as well as the self-regulating stance taken
by Brazilian ISPs. Senate candidate (and former
President) Jose Sarney sued and won his case in
the electoral court (which exists in part to “ensure
that all candidates are fairly represented in the
200
Regional Overviews